The Supreme Court has directed the Maharashtra government to establish a comprehensive policy to ensure prosecution delays do not keep accused individuals jailed indefinitely, emphasizing that defendants must not lose their liberty due to failures of the state.
The directive was issued by a bench comprising Justices A. Amanullah and Sheel Nagu on Friday. Although the court rejected the bail application of Kelvin Chindozie Okoro, a foreign national accused in a four-year-old murder case, it expressed strong dissatisfaction that the prosecution had examined only two out of forty-five witnesses during his four years in custody.
Concerns Over Prolonged Custody
In its ruling, the bench emphasized that the slow pace of trials has become a persistent concern. Under current legal frameworks, a chargesheet must be filed within 90 days of an arrest to prevent an accused from securing automatic bail. The court questioned why no substantial trial progress had been made in the four years following that initial period, demanding to know who was responsible for the delay.
State Admits Prosecution Shortcomings
The legal representative for Maharashtra acknowledged the lapse during the hearing, explaining that the prosecution is actively working to address administrative delays, which he noted are frequently found in older cases.
However, the bench rejected this explanation, pointing out that the state regularly opposes bail applications while failing to ensure trials proceed efficiently. Justice Amanullah characterized this approach as a double standard, noting that the court routinely encounters cases from Maharashtra where trials are delayed for three to five years, severely impacting personal liberty.
In its formal written order, the bench described the situation as disturbing, stating that the state appears totally lacking in its obligation to conduct trials without undue delay. The court has ordered the Maharashtra government to file a counter-affidavit explaining the administrative lapses.
Joint Hearing Scheduled With Punjab Case
The court’s reprimand follows a similar case addressed on Thursday involving trial delays in Punjab. In that instance, the same bench expressed its annoyance by imposing a personal cost of Rs 50,000 on the Amritsar Senior Superintendent of Police, which has been kept pending until the state government provides an official explanation.
The Supreme Court has scheduled a joint hearing for both the Maharashtra and Punjab matters on July 24 to review the responses from both state governments.
